skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
>>Aside: I’d also like to see a command line shell which runs outside the terminal emulator rather than inside it.

Plan 9 did something like that with its rio windows (that replace the terminal emulators) and its rc shell.

https://9p.io/wiki/plan9/using_rio/index.html

http://man.cat-v.org/plan_9/1/rio

> The problem with such a shell would be that all the simple utilities and tools one likes to use in a shell will not work without a tty (or pty or fake-pty-conhost.exe). So the shell by itself would be pretty useless.

Right -- no vi, no emacs, no readline, no curses -- nothing that uses cursor addressing. You have to start all over. Plan 9 can be seen as an experiment to find out how much you can simplify if you can abandon backwards compatibility.
> GamerGate
Actually it seems related to me. Leveraged short-selling is a tactic of activist investors to take control of a company, and there was an article about what they wanted to do with it. No doubt the past actions of activist investors in the gaming industry was fuel for this fire. I’m not a gamer and I don’t know what is going on, but I think it has something to do with getting rid of the ownership model of games to make way for cloud gaming and advertising, served with a political agenda. GameStop made the ownership model work. Every major cloud service provider, social media company, and their investors all want it gone. Gamers know that ownership is the only way to keep politics out of gaming.
The problem is that much of the buy demand seems to be on the retail side. But the retailers have shut that down, so you're left selling to a portion of the market that has the lease demand for what you're selling.
> you're here calling people dogs

No, he said "these people are like rabid dogs", which is not the same as "these people are dogs". In one case it's a simile, and the accent is on the compulsive aggression of a rabid dog. In the second case it's just an insult. Please don't stretch what other people said in order to make it sound as bad as possible.
I feel like the questions around Tesla's valuation are two-fold. The question as to why Tesla is so high is obvious, but the secondary question is why are existing automakers so low? Why is the market cap for existing automakers lower than total revenue?
What I think the law should be. I'm not qualified to say if there is a legal violation here (whether criminal, regulatory, or civil).

I said in another comment that my thoughts on this are in the "ought" category, not the "is" one.
It's a classic pump and dump because there's just no reason to believe that this is what's happening. There was a short squeeze at one point, but all of the funds known to hold large short positions had closed their positions by Wednesday morning; the value since then was most likely driven entirely by speculation.

In particular, I've seen a lot of speculators spreading the idea that margin calls will force everyone shorting Gamestop to buy stock at market price on Friday. This is wrong, and pretty unequivocally so, but I've had multiple friends come to me and explain that this is why they bought some.
The bull case for Tesla is that the car side of things is looking really good, but is only part of the story. In this narrative the opportunities in battery technology and utility scale power storage are not being taken into consideration by the bears.

I don't really have an opinion on it, but that's the case.
Tokyo-based company develops vision-improving smart glasses
Dropped from 500 to 117 now 238.

Lots of money changing hands.

The narrative appears to be that the shorts will have to eat the loss and cover at some point, but the house has taken possession of the short position and is now putting their thumb on the scale.

What drama, people already counting their student loans paid off as they scream “hold!”
Platforms are banning buys for retail, ofc it's going down. If rh and td didnt ban it I bet it would be even higher.
Ten year later someone will post it here, as a proof that the maintainer of the project is not doing his/her "job".

Also, I remember a case where after some time someone decided that since the maintainer was not answering, it was fine to add insults and threats.
WSB on Reddit had moderators. WSB on Discord, I'm not sure they could keep up.
> We have email with autocrypt to rally to.

For those unfamiliar:

https://autocrypt.org/

There are plans to add support for it to Tutanota[0], although ironically that blog post was written over a year ago and their FAQ still says that they don't even support interoperable PGP.[1]

When ProtonMail were asked two years ago about supporting Autocrypt, their response was quite negative but also vague[2], and there doesn't seem to have been much progress since.[3]

[0] https://tutanota.com/blog/posts/email-encryption/

[1] https://tutanota.com/faq/#pgp

[2] https://old.reddit.com/r/ProtonMail/comments/8dqk5n/protonma...

[3] https://github.com/ProtonMail/WebClient/issues/120
>Why should Robinhood pick a winner (siding against their own customers)?

Robinhood operates a lot like Facebook. The "Gold" subscriptions and margin interest are tiny portions of their actual revenue. We are not their customers, we are the product. They offer free trades in exchange for selling order flow data to hedge funds, which in turns allows them to manipulate the markets. Of course they would protect their actual customers.
Outwit certain parts of wall street, maybe. Any hedge fund making money off of deal flow is gonna make a huge profit when there's a big spread between buy/sell prices.
Spot-on with the multi-cloud story. But we don't plan to wait a few years :-).
I owe this a try as well. For me, vimperator/pentadactyl was an absolute dream. I kept them running for a long time, but eventually had to abandon them along with the old firefox versions. The WebExtension imitations don't even come close.
This will probably get worse as the value to engineers of fighting for architectural sanity diminishes in the modern semi-disposable project based job economy.

I have no stake in the the companies future? OK, add another layer of abstraction to 'fix' that nonissue. Whatever. I can avoid it for as long as I can see to care.
Others in this thread are pointing out issues with arbitration, which really muddies the water on how this can be handled. Definitely complaining to the SEC though. Imagine if they did the inverse of this, and stopped anyone from being able to sell a stock they were heavily invested in. That would be absolute madness. It’s the exact same ass-covering.
I don't see anything bad with the "celebrity" devs using open-source for their own "selfish" purposes. For the most part they do improve software, and help coding get more popular. Their work can help those devs go independent in some shape or form (or the least, it helps them get their next job more easily or put them in a stronger negotiating position).

The fact that they do a far bit of self-promotion should not be hold against them, in the end we are all working to achieve something in life, and for some, a necessary ingredient is some self-promotion through open-source.
MySQL/MariaDB split went fine. People will build or fork the software they need.
Did their clearing firm force their hand?

Webull had to stop because of their clearing firm.
That's a great essay - interesting to see how things could have been and used to be.

Aside, this article is now the #1 post. Seems you've got a good taste in reading. Any other recommendations?
I don't think "While mocking people with disabilities and homophobia is frequent, I have yet to see any racism or xenophobia" is the defense you think it is.
Brokers don't have a fiduciary interest, unlike Asset Managers.
So, no. They have no obligation to halt trades, usually they make money on volume of trades and would encourage people to trade more.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesfinancecouncil/2020/06/17...
I second this. Clojure is a thought process more than being a language. My JavaScript improved when I started writing Clojure.
"oh no our customers are making too money" seems like a very weird stance for this company to take.
I personally really like alt coins like Nano, which don't require mining in the same way BTC does. But those usually have their own set of problems.
hide/flag the post and move on
same, I don't have any $GME but I still feel like I lost a lot of money today b/c of these shenanigans.
Reading source code, especially source code that you're not familiar with, is a crucial skill for any programmer.

I've found annotated source code to be an extremely useful learning resource, personally.
"The left" is for democracy. There was once a time when that sentiment was shared across the political spectrum, but lately it seems that "the right" remains undecided about whether or not it is acceptable to threaten the lives of politicians who refused to overturn the results of an election. I still remember a time when both the left and right celebrated the strength of American democracy and the fact that people in America do not turn to violence when their side loses an election. The fact that right wing activists are crying "censorship" when platforms react to an attempt to use violence to overturn the results of an election by banning the terrorists who organized that attack speaks volumes about how far America has fallen.

It was not all that long ago that right wing activists were joining left wing activists in demanding that tech companies stop providing service to ISIS. Where were all these cries of censorship back then? It is only now that the right wing of American politics has aligned itself with terrorists that they have started whining about "free speech" and calling for increased regulation of tech companies that dare to kick terrorists off their platforms.
Matt Levine:

"It seems meaningless to talk about the price of GameStop stock, as though a single number could represent such an elusive concept. GameStop stock has all the prices at once."
Interestingly I think they're not entirely incompatible. If the funds can't cover their positions they will attempt to get money from somewhere. This could be loans or selling ownership of the fund, probably to other funds as it looks like has already happened with some. Effectively being forced to put more money in.

Fundamentally the funds made an extremely risky bet and the
market is (or was at one point) seemingly reasonably and expectedly betting against it with a short squeeze. The new part is the social hype driving the squeeze via an army of retail investors.

Agree some retail investors are inevitably going to be left with a net loss here, which will suck. But it was (and may still be) a reasonable play when viewing the market as a gambling platform (which the funds were doing by over-shorting).

My hope is that the people claiming to be cashing out their 401k on GME are partaking in anonymous internet hyperbole to fuel the hype and the vast majority are gambling with a few bucks they can afford to gamble with because they can't do anything else right now.
Unfortunately the account deactivation story is quite poor.

Under Settings > Account Information > Deactivate Account you're just sent to a customer service email form. They say it takes 1-3 business days to process.

As a side note, you have to close out all of your positions and transfer out all of your money before you're allowed to close the account. This seems unusual to me from experiences with other brokers.

From my understanding the average retail broker will allow you to transfer you assets out to another brokerage. You can do this as part of closing your account.

While just transferring money out separately and keeping the account open longer isn't a big deal, there's tax and other financial implications to having to close your positions instead of transfer them. You'll have to realize capital gains. You'll also have multiple banking days in which the price could move up while your money is transferred to another brokerage to re-buy the shares.
That post is three hours old with 1000+ points but is somehow ranked below multiple older posts with fewer points. It's currently ranked #27 putting it at the bottom of the homepage. It seems somebody is manipulating HN's ranking in effort to push it off the front page.
But what's the endgame? That the stock will go up forever, so that the existing investors are perpetually being paid by future investors?
> The narrative appears to be that the shorts will have to eat the loss and cover at some point

Supposed Melvin already has.
How is somebody being fired for this reason not news?
I think it's the "manipulative" that's debatable here, because the manipulation is effectively being done by a second party.

Is it manipulation if you're so predictable that an action by me causes you to always act a certain way? And I profit when you take that action?

If hedge funds refused to cover their shorts (I'm probably using the wrong terminology) and left them open, this wouldn't be an issue, no? Or, conversely, if market makers refused to sell options on overly volatile stocks / stocks being manipulated?
It's worth separating two goals

1. I don't want to hear Donald Trump, and I don't want to associate with anyone who likes him, or hear their ideas in my feed: this is solvable by distributed systems like Mastodon where node operators can just blacklist the Trump-aligned servers, and apply rules on their own.

2. I want Donald Trump to be silenced and not be able to say dangerous inflammatory things that rile his supporters up into violent attacks on democratic processes: this is going to require a centralized decision and really probably would work best if it was a law.

Deplatforming can partially work by demanding all reasonable node operators block the person. But then you get the ones whose niche is to be a haven of scum and villainy, like Gab, and they refuse.

This may be enough, though, if it isolates awful people into inaccessible backwaters.
Are you seriously calling for China, of all countries, to create a network free of censorship?
As is tradition.

(Dogecoin, not surprisingly, has had these kinds of run in every bitcoin bubble since its inception)
Brokers are not fiduciaries.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesfinancecouncil/2020/06/17...
Call me crazy, but I think if there's any HS classes or earlier, teaching algorithmic thinking, those kids are have a crazy head start if they choose CS.

I don't mean these classes where they get out and write

class Dog(Animal):
def bark(self):
print("a Dog is barking!")

but if there's young people being taught the difference between quadratic/exponential/polynomial algorithms, that's going to stew in their brains and ferment into gray matter that will ACTUALLY make them better programmers.

I'm not an educator, nor am I educated ABOUT education, but it's just my hunch. I've seen many a young buck come around with a fancy degree or whatever, and not be able to see a skip-list shaped hole for his skip-list shaped peg. That's hard to deal with at a meta scale. I can't develop a way to quickly train people OTJ how to think algorithmically. They either learned to think about the problems that way, or they learned to rely on some stupid Haskell/Python/Elixir/Kotlin/Blub thing, and can't get any meaningful work done quickly.
I don’t want to be banned but... You are, I think, blessed to not be able to imagine violence. When someone says violence is an outcome the violence becomes the goal — not reinstating accounts... You don’t physically attack a DC you sever as many links in and out as possible.
> Also, anyone who buys a Tesla because they like SpaceX rockets is an absolute dunce. That's like subscribing to the Washington Post because you like the navel oranges that Amazon Fresh delivers.

You're not getting it. Musk is running Tesla as a tech company, NOT a "car" company. That's why he's been able to build the company through years and years of unprofitability, as Bezos did with Amazon.

You're also not understanding the stock market (which is timely). Once that stock is sold to the market, the stock price only affects people's bonuses. It doesn't have any impact on the company's production or revenue.

People buy (or sell) stock based on whether they think the price is going to go up or down. It's that simple. Tesla doesn't pay a dividend, and doesn't confer any meaningful voting rights (as Musk has secured a supermajority). There is LITERALLY no other reason to hold Tesla stock than to think it will go up. There's no other value to it.

Why would it go up? Because of good press. Good press comes from a lot of events. The company doing well, financially, is great news! But rockets and satellites are just as good, if not better, than reports of high-quality automobiles.

There's a very, very thin relationship between non-voting, non-dividend-paying stock, and a company's fundamentals. It's mostly a shared illusion that it's based on financials which makes the stock market work at all.
Sorry, it looks like it was talked about too much on social media, causing the price to go up. The people in charge want it to go down, so it's blocked. Thanks for choosing Robinhood!
Its easy for a stock to decrease in value when most of the American trading platforms don't allow Americans to buy it.
AAL is definitely the fishiest of the bunch, it's not even close to back to precovid levels, and it's a reasonable buy for anyone who expects travel to return to normal at some point.

It reads like they got a list of positions to halt buying on from their investers.
That's a lot like how banks create money.
Not being in the US I don't know this but can Robinhood be sued, like a lot of people seem to be calling for, just for refusing to handle trades on a stock?
More than 10 Trading Halts in just a couple of hours. https://www.nyse.com/trade-halt-current
Market incentives are why we have it at all.

Tesla fought against the legacy companies mocking them and most of the press lying about them for ten years. They pulled off a miracle and succeeded in spite of all that and now legacy companies that did nothing want to legislate their own mistake away? Fuck that.

If legacy car companies want to use the network tesla built they can pay them for the privilege.

The irony is I think tesla did offer them access under better terms and they refused (either out of spite or stupidity, I’m not sure).

There’s no way we would have the EV transition we have now (this early) without Tesla. I think there’s no way a government standard would have worked for building this up (one did exist, and I’d argue it didn’t work).
The big funds have many connections
Robinhood is in a heads I win, tails you lose scenario with the press here. Wealth inequality will get even worse if regular people lose a ton of money on GME. They already fucked up by causing one guy to commit suicide, so you can't blame them for playing it safe this time.
Houston doesn't have zero whites or Asians. Dallas's executive leadership (not Dallas itself or even the city council) does, but I didn't claim it was diverse; those are two separate sentences, both responses to the parent's claim that there were major cities in Texas that are uniquely unsafe for minorities.
My guess is Citadel and Susquehanna stopped routing RH's flow, and since RH, despite being a $10b company, is too incompetent to route its own orders to the exchanges, they had to acquiesce to the demands of the companies that route for them.
Events like these make it clear why the vast majority of Wall Street practices are banned in Islam (including shorting). It's a terrible predatory practice that is not just gambling, but also creating artificial risk that does not correspond to the value being created from such transactions. This can easily collapse the entire market as we already saw in 2008 and many times before.

The sooner we prohibit these terrible exploitative practices (lending money with interest being the first to go), the better and stronger and more fair the economy will become. Unfortunately most people don't know, and they jump to things like "tax the rich" which has no meaning really.
By installing the brakes right. There's no correlation between those two things.

It would be like me saying to another automaker, how can I trust your brakes when the entertainment computer routinely crashes? Or how can I trust your suspension when your CVTs don't last as long as they should?

These things don't correlate that way.
That's great news, Brian. The key here is that it was handled quickly. The longer it goes on unnoticed, the more difficult it becomes to unravel, as a domain gets transferred from registrar to registrar and from owner to owner.

I can confirm that Neurologist dot com and Chip dot com were also stolen at the same time. There may be others.
> These players don't care about losses because Their losses are the price of admission to watch your curated hedge fund burn.

I'm seeing stories of people putting their modest life savings into GameStop stock. When the bubble invariably bursts, they will be left penniless. We will see people making actual, huge losses that they very much care about.

Sure, there are also the people to whom this is a game/collective action, and who can afford to lose a few hundred bucks to make a statement or have fun. But let's not pretend that that's the case for everyone. There will be painful outcomes here, with lots of people spending more than they can afford on stocks that they will only be able to sell at a tiny fraction of the current price. Stock price manipulation can be enjoyable, but it shouldn't be confused with prices going up because the business behind the stocks actually does better.

This is such a weird situation: On Twitter I see several of the same people who are usually like "Bitcoin is a scam, it's pure speculation without fundamentals" now applauding the GameStop situation just because this time the speculation without fundamentals also hurts hedge funds (but ignoring that it will hurt lots of individual investors as well).

> a repeatable strategy that will work over and over.

As long as the people playing along have the real money to put into real stocks that are not worth that real money. It would be more sustainable/repeatable if people had stopped driving up the price once a reasonable ceiling was reached.
This is messed up. The only the stock exchange (NASDAQ/NYSE) should be able to halt a stock. We need a "stock neutrality" for trading platforms.

Robinhood claim that they are protecting investors assumes that they don't understand the risks of stock investing. Did the shorts understand the risks of shorting a stock over 100%?
I mean based on popular understanding, they KNEW they should be figuring out electric cars (and have been!) but:

1- Oil companies pressured the industry/government to keep supporting their platform
2- Most car companies didn't consider themselves battery companies, which Tesla obviously is. They sell the product "cars" not so much the underlying technologies that make them function. Thinking of Tesla as a car company and not a battery/energy company is a misunderstanding of where they spend their energy. It's like thinking Google is a search engine and not an adverting/information brokerage company.
Is the debt piling up or do you manage it by automating deploys, integration testing and continuous delivery.
Don't they all have the same LPs?

Behind all of these nefarious entities is CALPERS, etc. just trying to keep your pension fund solvent.
As a landlord, and landlording in an area with restricted rent, it makes zero difference. It's only good if you stay where you rent, but if you move, it's market rent. You can't adequately control market rent because there are so so many variable on what market rent is for every individual unit, location, type, etc. I'm all for the eliminating zoning restrictions though.
Not defining terms and making huge assumptions is vital if you want to offer a comment like this.
depends on when the positions are liquidated.

everyone who bought yesterday is fighting exchanges whose only option for GME is "sell" because buying is restricted.

I don't know how some of these shorts will find 20 million shares by tomorrow.